Re: Date/Time Types : internals

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
>> I guess the point is that for hundreds of years, the same day could
>> have a different date depending which country's calendar you were
>> looking at.  I'm not entirely clear why there's a problem if you
>> pick the Gregorian calendar and apply it retroactively.
>
> Which is, in fact, exactly what our code does.  I think that bit in the
> docs is trying to explain why we do that rather than try to get the
> code to reflect what people really used back then.

What I find a bit confusing is that this part talks about the Julian
calendar, but elsewhere:

<para>
The SQL standard states that <quote>Within the definition of a
<quote>datetime literal</quote>, the <quote>datetime
value</quote>s are constrained by the natural rules for dates and
times according to the Gregorian calendar</quote>. Dates between
1582-10-05 and 1582-10-14, although eliminated in some countries
by Papal fiat, conform to <quote>natural rules</quote> and are
hence valid dates. <productname>PostgreSQL</> follows the SQL
standard's lead by counting dates exclusively in the Gregorian
calendar, even for years before that calendar was in use.
</para>

So which calendar are we using, Julian or Gregorian?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company